MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1913914512 · doi:10.1111/nin.12118

Actor‐Network Theory as a sociotechnical lens to explore the relationship of nurses and technology in practice: methodological considerations for nursing research

2015· article· en· W1913914512 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Inquiry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Diagnosis and Documentation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociotechnical systemConceptualizationPopularityNursing theorySociologyNursing researchPerspective (graphical)Actor–network theoryHealth informaticsEngineering ethicsKnowledge managementPsychologyComputer scienceNursingMedicineMEDLINESocial scienceEngineeringPublic healthSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Actor-Network Theory is a research lens that has gained popularity in the nursing and health sciences domains. The perspective allows a researcher to describe the interaction of actors (both human and non-human) within networked sociomaterial contexts, including complex practice environments where nurses and health technology operate. This study will describe Actor-Network Theory and provide methodological considerations for researchers who are interested in using this sociotechnical lens within nursing and informatics-related research. Considerations related to technology conceptualization, levels of analysis, and sampling procedures in Actor-Network Theory based research are addressed. Finally, implications for future nursing research within complex environments are highlighted.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.598
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.024 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it